Limit amount of players that can join a match with only one vehicle (m1a1 aim and click-baits)
MBT
Abrams Turret ring fix
Abrams Tusk actually working in SEP v1 + v2
M829a3 for post 2000 Abrams (I won’t even be greedy and ask for A4)
The Abrams does not need a spall liner like people say. Just fixing the turret ring will make the Abrams competitive. I also think the SEP V3 should not be added since it will be unfairly balanced as a US meta tank.
AA
Move ADATS down to 11.3, it’s too ineffective for beyond sight aa functionality and the rounds are too inefficient vs ground MBTs. It should also have 2nd or 3rd gen thermals
Introduce an actual aa that would be appropriate in top tier, perhaps the M142 HIMARS
They should of added Sepv3 instead of Sepv2 it would actually have upgrades worth getting like increase turret/hull armor and Trophy aps even though sepv2 can also get. As for the turret ring it was bug reported a while go and probably won’t get fix for many months to come. Also, M142 Himars is not an AA system its a rocket artillery system. I personally would like to see the SLAMRAAM humve added with its aim9x and aim120 combo.
Personally i don’t think the SEPv2 should have came as a separate tank. Just a modification. All it did is some slight mods. Nothing worth the +400k rp research.
I agree with thr SLAMRAAM being added not the patriot. patriot is more of a theater defense system. You will be shooting down aircraft past their airfield.
I can’t find a picture of it but you might have the right one. The only problem I can think of is there isn’t an integrated radar set like on the Adats or Pantsir. Not sure how they’d get around that. Maybe a radar trailer attached haha.
Adding DU armor (the in-game Abrams are based on non-DU export versions)
Adding spall liners to all Abrams (it’s integrated)
Adding DU hulls to the M1A1 upwards (was tested on five hulls from at least 1997-March 2006, and then was rolled out in a new armor package in August 2006)
Fixing the fuel bulkhead models
Turret ring fix in more detail - Making it volumetric, making it the correct 250mm+ LoS thickness
Lowering the turret down as it is overly exposed
Adding the Improved Turret Side Armor
Fixing the position of the hydraulics
There’s probably more, but that’s all I can think of off the top of my head.
100% agree the US tech tree is abysmal. They have tanks like IMP1 at 11.0 I mean a tank designed and built in the 80s in The golf war we didn’t even use them We used M1A1 They have no variance of any infantry fighting vehicles. Let’s take them to history class 73 Easting T72B3’s got shit on
i completely agree. I stopped researching the V2 as its just a slower more visible tank. I’ve been less frustrated playing 10.0 Soviet tanks than USA 10.0.
There’s no way Gaijin would sell their premiums and then prevent people from playing with them.
The only realistic solution is for Gaijin to push other nations’ high tier premiums harder with discounts.
Just as a word of caution, people tend to have unrealistic expectations about this one. Even if it were to be fixed, it’d still be totally vulnerable to all top-tier APFSDS.
What’s not working about it?
This is kinda silly.
The US M1’s currently have the second best firepower of any nation in the entire game, only beaten by the Type 10. It’d be extremely unfair to other nations which have worse MBT’s if these M1’s were given yet another buff that ultimately won’t change the fact that it’s poor playerbase is the main fault for it’s poor performance.
The SEP v3 should’ve been added instead of the SEP v2 9 months ago already.
The SEP v2 offers nothing new, whilst the SEP v3 offers actual armour improvements.
HIMARS & SPAA in a single sentence? HIMARS stands for: ‘‘High Mobility Artillery Rocket System’’.
If HIMARS is a SPAA, then the Katyusha is a WW2 SPAA.
Let me take a wild guess here: You don’t play any other tech trees than the US one, or at the very least you don’t play other nations past Rank V and thus have no basis for comparison. I’m also betting you’re not exactly the best player around and your stats will reflect that.
Every single time I see someone claiming the US tech tree is poor, the description I just gave is a 100% match. Will it be any different this time?
Just wait until you find out when the 11.3 T-80U was produced.
War Thunder matches vehicles based on capabilities, not year of introduction. The IPM1 is one of the best MBT’s relative to it’s BR across any nation.
If you want to advocate for historical-based matchmaking, prepare for the following:
T-64A at a lower BR than the M60A1 AOS and at the same BR as the basic Leopard 1.
T-80U at the same BR as a Leopard 1A5 and Leopard 2A4.
Chieftain Mk.10 at the same BR as a M1A1 Abrams.
M60A1 RISE (P) at the same BR as a Challenger Mk.3.
I can’t help but be amused when you’re proudly stating others should be informed about history, and then continue to claim the 2011- T-72B3 fought in the 1990-1991 Gulf War.
The M1A1 Abram’s and M2/3 Bradly IFV’s were fighting early model T-72 A and B’s and Shilka’s IN A SANDSTORM if the enemies would have had thermal imagers, they would have absolutely WRECKED the US in the engagement.
